Nebraska

CASES
  • Click here to download all Nebraska cases
  • Arndt v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 270 Neb. 172 (2005)
    Motorist's driver's license was revoked by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) following his arrest for driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor. Motorist appealed revocation. The District Court, Sarpy County, William B. Zastera, J., reversed. DMV appealed. The Supreme Court, Gerrard, J., held that sworn report submitted to director of DMV was insufficient to confer authority on him to revoke motorist's license administratively, as report was not prepared by the "arresting officer," pursuant to statutory requirement. Affirmed.
  • Caspers Const. Co. v. Nebraska State Patrol, 700 N.W.2d 587 (Neb. 2005)
    Neb.Rev.Stat. § 75-302(11) (Reissue 2003) defines "intrastate commerce" as "commerce between any place in this state and any other place in this state and not in part through any other state." "Motor carrier" is defined as "any person other than a regulated motor carrier who or which owns, controls, manages, operates, or causes to be operated any motor vehicle used to transport passengers or property over any public highway in this state." § 75-302(12).
  • Connelly v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 9 Neb.App. 708 (2000)
    Motorist sought judicial review of order of the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), which revoked his driving privileges. The District Court, Douglas County, Sandra L. Dougherty, J., affirmed DMV's decision, and motorist appealed. The Court of Appeals, Carlson, J., held that: (1) officer who questioned motorist and administered field sobriety tests was the "arresting officer," for purposes of regulation requiring arresting officer to testify at revocation hearing, and (2) motorist's due process rights were not violated by field training officer's failure to appear at hearing. Affirmed.
  • Freeman v. Neth, 18 Neb.App. 592 (2010)
    Motorist appealed revocation of his driver's license by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The District Court, Buffalo County, John P. Icenogle, J., entered judgment reversing the DMV. The DMV appealed. The Court of Appeals, Moore, J., held that arresting officer's sworn report was not timely submitted to director of DMV as required to confer jurisdiction on DMV to revoke motorist's driver's license. Affirmed.
  • Kriz v. Neth, 19 Neb.App. 819 (2012)
    Motorist appealed from administrative decision revoking his driver's license. The District Court, Box Butte County, Leo Dobrovolny, J., affirmed, and he appealed. The Court of Appeals, Cassel, J., held that: [1] motorist was given reasonable time and opportunity to present evidence in driver's license revocation proceeding, and [2] it was not a violation of motorist's due process rights for the hearing officer not to ask for a continuance on her own motion. Affirmed.
  • Larkins v. Department of Motor Vehicles of State, Not Reported in N.W.2d (2010)
    IMPLIED CONSENT Officer's sworn report contained sufficient facts to establish, in license revocation proceeding, that motorist was operating or in physical control of vehicle. District court found that officer's report which stated, "stopped vehicle for speeding," was insufficient to establish that motorist was operating the vehicle. The notion that one's vehicle could be speeding without such person driving or operating the vehicle was illogical. Therefore, the sworn report was sufficient to establish that motorist was in control of the vehicle when it was stopped for speeding. Neb.Rev.St. § 60–498.01(3). Appeal from the District Court for Sarpy County: Max Kelch, Judge. Motion for rehearing sustained. Original memorandum opinion withdrawn. Reversed and remanded with direction.
  • Law v. Nebraska Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 18 Neb.App. 237 (2010)
    Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) revoked licensee's driving privileges for one year after licensee was arrested for driving under the influence of alcohol and refused a chemical test. Licensee appealed. The District Court, Douglas County, J. Michael Coffey, J., reversed and vacated the order. DMV appealed. The Court of Appeals, Inbody, C.J., held that omission of second arresting officer's signature on sworn report as to licensee's refusal to submit to chemical test was technical deficiency that did not deprive DMV of jurisdiction. Reversed and remanded with directions.
  • Murray v. Neth, 279 Neb. 947 (2010)
    Motorist appealed revocation of his driver's license by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The District Court, Scotts Bluff County, Randall L. Lippstreu, J., affirmed. Motorist appealed. The Court of Appeals, 17 Neb.App. 900, 773 N.W.2d 394, affirmed. Motorist filed petition for further review. The Supreme Court, Gerrard, J., held that: [1] Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) was authorized in administrative license revocation (ALR) proceeding to return the original sworn report to arresting officer for the purpose of soliciting a sworn addendum including information necessary to cure a jurisdictional deficiency, and [2] DMV's soliciting addendum to cure jurisdictional defect did not demonstrate that it was insufficiently impartial to fairly adjudicate charges. Affirmed.
  • O'Hara v. Department of Motor Vehicles, 14 Neb.App. 709 (2006)
    Motorist appealed from a decision of the District Court, Douglas County, Richard J. Spethman, J., that affirmed the revocation of motorist's driver's license by the state Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The Court of Appeals, Carlson, J., held that: [1] there was no proper revocation of motorist's driver's license from which motorist could appeal to District Court, and [2] order of administrative license revocation was not sufficient rendition of judgment to create revocation decision reviewable by District Court. Appeal dismissed, and cause remanded with directions.
  • Penry v. Neth, 20 Neb.App. 276 (2012)
    Driver sought judicial review of administrative revocation of her driver's license. The District Court, Lancaster County, Steven D. Burns, J., vacated and remanded administrative determination. Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) appealed. The Court of Appeals, Moore, J., held that: [1] arresting officer's appearance in administrative license revocation (ALR) hearing by telephone was authorized by statute, and [2] allowing arresting officer to be sworn and to testify by telephone at ALR hearing did not violate driver's due process rights. Reversed and remanded with directions.
  • Polikov v. Neth, 699 N.W.2d 802 (Neb. 2005)
    The power to design a pretrial diversion program is a legislative function and that therefore, in enacting code sections that address the same, the Legislature did not run afoul of the separation of powers clause.
  • Sanderson v. Department of Motor Vehicles, Not Reported in N.W.2d (2006)
    The Department of Motor Vehicles (the Department) appeals the judgment of the district court for Madison County, which reversed the decision of the Department to revoke the driver's license of Kriss L. Sanderson for 1 year.
  • Searcey v. Nebraska Dept. of Motor Vehicles, 12 Neb.App. 517 (2004)
    Motorist sought judicial review of a decision by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) revoking his driver's license. The District Court, Douglas County, Gregory M. Schatz, J., affirmed, and motorist appealed. The Court of Appeals, Sievers, J., held that: [1] request for continuance on basis of arresting officer's unavailability failed to state facts sufficient to make a reasoned decision, but [2] denial of continuance would have resulted in substantial injustice. Affirmed.
  • State v. Arterburn, 276 Neb. 47 (2008)
    Defendants charged with driving under the influence (DUI) filed pleas in bar based on the disqualification of their commercial driver's licenses for one year. The County Court, Adams County, Jack R. Ott, J., overruled the pleas in bar. Defendants appealed. The District Court, Adams County, Stephen R. Illingworth, J., reversed. State appealed. The Supreme Court, Wright, J., held that: [1] prosecution for DUI, following disqualification of defendants' commercial driver's licenses, did not violate double jeopardy; [2] Legislature intended commercial license disqualification for DUI to be a civil sanction; and [3] commercial license disqualification for DUI was not so punitive in its purpose or effect as to negate the Legislature's intent to create a civil sanction. Judgments of District Court reversed, and causes remanded with directions.
  • Strong v. Neth, 267 Neb. 523 (2004)
    Commercial driver's license was administratively revoked by the Department of Motor Vehicles. Licensee appealed. The District Court, Scotts Bluff County, Randall L. Lippstreu, J., sustained the administrative revocation. Licensee appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Licensee filed petition for further review, which the Supreme Court granted. The Supreme Court, Miller-Lerman, J., held that: [1] licensee's forfeiture of bond in lieu of appearance in Wyoming on charge of driving under the influence constituted “conviction” under Driver License Compact, and [2] licensee's conduct in Wyoming could be used to revoke his commercial driver's license in Nebraska. Affirmed.
  • Teeters v. Neth, 18 Neb.App. 585 (2010)
    Licensee sought review of Department of Motor Vehicles' revocation of her driver's license. The District Court, Dawson County, James E. Doyle IV, J., reversed. Department appealed. The Court of Appeals, Carlson, J., held that licensee was sufficiently identified in arresting officer's report as driver of vehicle so as to confer jurisdiction on Department to revoke driver's license. Reversed and remanded with directions.
  • Wilczewski v. Neth, 273 Neb. 324 (2007)
    Motorist applied for driver's license. The Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) denied application. Motorist appealed. The District Court, Douglas County, J. Michael Coffey, J., affirmed. Motorist appealed. The Supreme Court, McCormack, J., held that motorist was not eligible for a driver's license until his fiveyear period of ineligibility to drive in another state had ended. Affirmed.
  • Yelli v. Neth, 16 Neb.App. 639 (2008)
    Commercial truck driver appealed the revocation of his commercial driver's license by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). The District Court, Stanton County, Robert B. Ensz, J., affirmed the revocation, and driver appealed. The Court of Appeals, Sievers, J., held that it lacked jurisdiction over the appeal. Appeal dismissed.
STATUTES

Adoption of Federal Regulations

What Constitutes a CMV

Major Disqualifying Offenses

Major Disqualifying Offenses (Alcohol)

Serious Traffic Offenses

Identification of Conviction

Masking Convictions

10-Day Posting Requirement

Other CDL Provisions